TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

FeministBees Archive

View 0 posts and 171 comments by FeministBees on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

I can no longer, in good conscience, consider myself a "feminist", if this is what the movement has become. If your whole identity as a feminist was wrapped up in your participation in AskFeminists, then you really weren't such a strong feminist anyways. I've even had some of my comments deleted, but I've also contributed productively and my feminism extends beyond reddit. I'm sorry you've lost your drive to be a feminist, but basing your identity as a feminist on subscribing to a subreddit does…
/r/MensRights30/05/14 09:59 PM
2

Whoa! Am I reading that right? Are Catholic Argentinians more in favor of abortion than non-Catholics?
/r/MensRights04/12/13 02:25 PM
0

Maybe the women visit it too, or would be more apt to visit if the community was more open to allowing them basic human rights?
/r/MensRights04/12/13 05:00 AM
-2

This is actually where I've been a little confused: Why are we assuming the church suddenly belongs to all those men? Why is their defense of it seen as legitimate "ownership" while the feminist protest not viewed with a similar lens? Because if the church is understood to be owned by the community, then wouldn't 7000 Argentinian reproductive rights activists have more claim to ownership than 1500 anti-reproductive rights Argentinians?
/r/MensRights04/12/13 04:42 AM
1

You know, I have always wondered why a lot of the MRA leadership seems to be in their 50s and 60s. Admittedly, this fact does explain some distinct generational and intellectual composition of modern day feminists and MRAs. I think that some of it can be explained by advances in public education and the availability of higher education to young men and women born in the 80s. I mean, it's pretty obvious that many MRAs are oblivious of much feminist scholarship of the late 90s and new millennium, …
/r/MensRights27/10/13 01:57 AM
1

Your not my sibling. What are you, twice my age or something?
/r/MensRights26/10/13 12:55 PM
0

Actually, I did. Your writing is not that complex. It's pretentious, but not really complex. It's exactly as I described. Adhom. Well, I didn't really expect much. Your original commentary was pretty much vacuous. As is most of what you say. w/e
/r/MensRights26/10/13 03:00 AM
0

You wrote a blog post comprised mainly of sentences built around victim politics related buzzwords, based on your own opinion and referencing a small few out of the world's vast collection of writing, combined with some feminist theory, and you're offering it up in a comment as though it has any real meaning. That's about the laziest and most self-aggrandizing piece of bullshit I've seen you drop yet. You didn't even read it... W/e, I imagine that some of the language used is beyond you. Further…
/r/MensRights25/10/13 10:47 PM
1

I left all my horse behind when I moved to the big city. But don't make the mistake of thinking I don't value the power of imagination. I wrote a blog post just last night where I discussed how our culture is dominated by a white, cisgender, heterosexual, masculine narratives. It is imperative that we all learn how to displace our own subjectivity, and imagination makes for a powerful tool to do so. Unfortunately, I don't think you consider your anti-feminist narrative as subjective. Rather you'…
/r/MensRights24/10/13 06:55 PM
2

For someone who sees feminist boogie wymen in every shadow, I don't think I'm really evidence of anything other than your overactive imagination.
/r/MensRights24/10/13 03:09 PM
2

This is typical of your style, soulcakeduck, playing stupid as an obfuscation tactic. Thanks for letting me know. Is this ad-hom and personal vendetta your typical style? Yes, this is her universal response to being... asked questions. Oneiorosgrip holds some truths to be self-evident (e.g. all feminists are up to no good), and people who fail to understand these self-evident truths are being dishonest about the self-evidence of said truths. I am not sure if oneiorosgrip is aware of how she trea…
/r/MensRights24/10/13 02:40 PM
2

Yeah... I don't quite know if we share the same understanding of what strawmen or moving goalposts mean. But I am nearly 100% sure I haven't lied. Good try though, not too surprising for oneiorosgrip. Thanks for letting me know. Is this ad-hom and personal vendetta your typical style?
/r/MensRights24/10/13 02:14 PM
2

This is typical of your style, soulcakeduck, playing stupid as an obfuscation tactic. Thanks for letting me know. Is this ad-hom and personal vendetta your typical style? Yes, this is her universal response to being... asked questions. Oneiorosgrip holds some truths to be self-evident (e.g. all feminists are up to no good), and people who fail to understand these self-evident truths are being dishonest about the self-evidence of said truths. I am not sure if oneiorosgrip is aware of how she trea…
/r/MensRights22/10/13 12:02 PM
5

No, not really.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 01:11 AM
2

I would probably describe them differently than Jaye Hill. But Yes, I think I believe something like that.
/r/MensRights19/10/13 12:48 AM
3

np, I was curious because the context of it made it seem strange if the speaker had been a woman.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 11:52 PM
3

Jaye Hill is a man.
/r/MensRights18/10/13 10:21 PM
0

I know Connell's anti-male shaming. You know nothing. Seriously, this is one of the most ignorant things I've seen you say. But it does support my contention that when it comes to feminism, you don't know shit. I picked Connell because I believe that her work actually provides one of the most liberating accounts of masculinity among feminists, and certainly more liberating than the accounts provided by MRAs. She is the farthest from "anti-male," unless you're Paul Elam, of course. But I'm really…
/r/MensRights15/10/13 02:30 PM
1

Yes, like you've already dismissed a huge amont of effort it took to discuss two pithy little lines by you. In fact, your very admonition that "there was some disagreement within the historical movement" demonstrates that you already know some of the story of dissension within feminism (something I demonstrate as being essential to modern day feminism in the above response to you). Those aspects of feminism that involve people doing nothing but sitting around with their pens wagging and their th…
/r/MensRights15/10/13 05:29 AM
1

Seriously, you haven't. You've asserted these things before (without evidence), and you've dodged them before. You've linked me to walls of text (like you've done here to another redditor who dared to dissent). And you've demanding I spend huge quantities of time to go through each of your little points, fact checking for you, etc. While in turn, you almost always duck my questions, and project dishonesty and malice onto me. I regularly dispute the idea of a "mainstream" feminism here (in the "d…
/r/MensRights15/10/13 04:54 AM
0

Seriously... why aren't you dealing with the issues I've pointed out head on? Consider for a moment what it is that you think is so "bad" about me. Is it anything I've said or done? Your only claim to discount what I am saying is that you believe all feminists are [something bad] and there for I am something bad. You haven't even shown me where I've been "dishonest." In what way have I been "not honest". I admit that I make mistakes (we all do), but your claim that I'm dishonest hasn't come from…
/r/MensRights15/10/13 04:34 AM
0

You're... really different. Your blog seems to be almost 20 years out of date (here is the text of the reauthorization). I understand that the perceptive of the MRM is that any mention of women as victims is implicitly a denial of men as victims, and in this regard I am not sure how this can be resolved. So it isn't "dishonesty" it is just a fundamental difference in how we (you and I specifically) understand these issues. It's probably a respective difference in how we learn and seek out new kn…
/r/MensRights15/10/13 03:22 AM
1

Sorry, I edited my comment a little: let me reitterate: He never really critiques the ideas of critical theory or Marxism, in fact, he outright admits that he doesn't know enough about communism, Marxism or critical theory (42:38). He isn't making rational arguments. He explicitly says that he is rejecting these ideas because of a narrow range of personal experiences he has experienced. That isn't evidence for anything other then the fact that he probably spends to much time on the internet and …
/r/MensRights15/10/13 01:46 AM
1

It's a really long video, and by the time I got to the part where he started talking about "Cultural Marxism," it's pretty clear he's using it as a snarl word (phrase?). And as to his "critique," he simply sets up a straw "commie" and knocks it over... weirdly enough, he even finds himself siding with Hitler on the topic of communism. He never really critiques the ideas of critical theory or Marxism, in fact, he outright admits that he doesn't know enough about communism, Marxism or critical the…
/r/MensRights15/10/13 01:36 AM
1

Also, I have never seen someone talk about Mein Kampf in such "glowing" terms. It's also weird that she/he seems to think that being critical of patriotism is bad. I mean, I am not really buying his interpretation of 1984, but I am almost 98% positive that the moral of 1984 isn't that we need more patriotism. And anyone who says "I've already made one Mein Kampf reference, another can't hurt," really ought to back up a bit, and reevaluate their life. :( omg. I'm only at 14:37... that is a lot of…
/r/MensRights15/10/13 01:17 AM
2

I think he means that the way the person in the video (and in general how the Right) uses the word is not actually related to the way that the term is used among those who are educated about Marxism. If you view the Wikipedia page: In current politics, the term has also been associated by Conservatives with a set of values that, it is claimed, are in simple contradiction with traditional values of Western society and Christian religion.[9] Undermining these is believed to be the true purpose of …
/r/MensRights15/10/13 01:02 AM
0

I am not really sure why you felt the need to comment about "debunking"? Nothing I said was debunked... People are disagreeing about interpretations, but that's different. It wasn't really a derail... I specifically addressed the content of your OP. Unless dissension from oneiorosgrip is an attempt to derail. I'm not heartbroken that you can't really respond, I wasn't trying to pick a fight. Just voicing an alternative way to interpret the "trolling." As some other folks have noted, these posts …
/r/MensRights14/10/13 05:05 AM
0

You're quote is exactly not Marxist, as Marx himself would outright reject Aristotle's claim in light of the way economic inequality operates within capitalism. Aristotle did not live during capitalism, and his comment reflects that fact. The significant difference between taking about how "he rich have been fucking with the poor for millenia" and Marxism, is that the latter understands how capitalism is an important part of said "fucking with the poor." Capitalism hasn't been around forever, an…
/r/MensRights14/10/13 01:42 AM
2

From your link: Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens participate equally—either directly or through elected representatives—in the proposal, development, and creation of laws. It encompasses social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination. I was using democratic in the sense that feminism is part social and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination. In tu…
/r/MensRights14/10/13 01:30 AM
0

YMMV, but I've seen distinctly Marxist explanations of certain social problems by MRAs. Whether they recognize that they're using Marixist concepts or terminology doesn't really change the fact that they were articulating these problems through Marxism. They may not conclude by prescribing the Communist Manifesto, but that doesn't change the fact that their observations and arguments are parallel to those made by Marxists.
/r/MensRights13/10/13 11:53 PM
-1

I might have been a little generous about the Marxism. I don't actually have on hand any specific instance of an MRA ought right identifying as Marixst, though I've seen a fair amount of MRAs articulate their concerns for men and boys using marxist language, talking about problems with capitalism and class inequality. As part of the reason why I was being "a little generous," and why I don't have an example on hand, is because I've noticed lately a significant decline in the number of MRAs with …
/r/MensRights13/10/13 10:49 PM
-3

There are certainly influential feminists, both politically and not so politically. I just don't think they make up a majority of any part of the electorate. I am also willing to agree that the feminists have done a great deal of work drafting and pushing for the VAWA, but I am not sure why this is being outlined as an instance of feminists against men. AFAIK, other than the title, the VAWA is gender neutral: . . . The bottom line is – violence is violence no matter what gender the victim. Becau…
/r/MensRights13/10/13 10:18 PM
-1

I am not familiar with the Sublime song, but I think I'm getting your drift. It does seem that in the case of the song "Date Rape" it was in fact rape. This is very different from the scenario I hear from many feminists, exemplified by a video I saw a year or so ago, where a drunk woman forced her way into someone's car and demanded sex, and many feminists claimed that if the men in the car had acquiesced, they would have been raping the woman. I've never heard of this before. Do you have a link…
/r/MensRights13/10/13 09:52 PM
-4

...I don't know where you're getting the evidence to substantiate your claim that "Academia and political feminists control..." I guess my first place to disagree come from the fact that, as part of "academic" feminism, I don't see a significant among of unifying consensus that would necessary for the kind of control you are suggesting. Second, there is no unified (or non-unified for that matter) feminist controlled message, marching orders... or funding (I wish!). But I am not entirely sure who…
/r/MensRights13/10/13 07:33 PM
0

thanks :P
/r/MensRights13/10/13 07:22 PM
-1

Since feminists aren't going to "win" any open debates, they have to play these little games. I suspect that the OP in the the other thread was fake as well, though I don't know the exact motivation. I think the vast majority of feminists don't really know much about the MRM, in it's current form. And if there were to be an open debate, who would debate for who? Feminism doesn't have any one feminist, or even a group of feminists, who speak for its whole. That is what I mean when I say it's a de…
/r/MensRights13/10/13 06:55 PM
-1

Thanks! While I don't identify as an MRA, I do identify some men's issues as serious an in need of addressing. I wouldn't fault the MRM for being inconsistent, maybe individual or identified groups of MRAs, but not the entire movement. I think it's something that ought be fostered more, and to a certain extent is already happening. For example, I actually share a lot of similar sentiments as Canadian Association for Equality. I think it would be really interesting to see a Men's Center, because …
/r/MensRights13/10/13 06:44 PM
-1

This may be a fishing trip for quotes that can be used to claim that MRAs are inconsistent in debating whether or not drunk sex is rape, or it may be a sneaky attempt to change the way we all think by associating a perpetrator-victim mentality with the voluntary act of accepting and consuming drinks. I am (was?) under the impression that this isn't actually a settled question within the MRM. I mean, I certainly agree that there are MRAs that don't believe in things like date rape or that consent…
/r/MensRights13/10/13 06:17 PM
2

That is the answer to the question posed: What does that website have to do with this story? A top level comment mentioned the website modern-females. That's what the website has to do with the story.
/r/MensRights12/10/13 10:41 PM
0

That comment was open in another tab, but the 10 minute comment wait made me forget it. Regardless, it's what I believe.
/r/MensRights12/10/13 06:20 PM
4

So... you think it's correct or "right" to describing contemporary gender issues as "the sad decline of modern women" and "why women in general are so difficult to live with"?
/r/MensRights11/10/13 11:19 PM
1

...I didn't post a top level comment, I responded to one. CherryBites is the person who linked to the website, so ask her/him. Yes, both websites are "bullshit."
/r/MensRights11/10/13 07:39 PM
0

I on the same page. I read the original piece and I thought the author was being really insensitive. In general I find Jezebel to be benign, with occasional moments of goodness and badness. But the original article was thoughtless. I'm glad they retracted it and tried it again, with more thought.
/r/MensRights11/10/13 07:27 PM
2

I don't know whether CherryBites contributes to the site, that wasn't the claim I was making. I was arguing that people opposed to "man hating" probably ought to avoid using misogynistic rhetoric. For example, describing contemporary gender issues as "the sad decline of modern women" and "why women in general are so difficult to live with." My comment was direct specifically at the website, not CherryBites him/herself. There are some people who use the a sample admittedly offensive Jezebel artic…
/r/MensRights11/10/13 07:00 PM
0

I am saying that people opposed to "man hating" probably ought to avoid using misogynistic rhetoric. For example, describing contemporary gender issues as "the sad decline of modern women" and "why women in general are so difficult to live with."
/r/MensRights11/10/13 06:48 PM
0

(shouldn't throw stones)
/r/MensRights11/10/13 05:46 PM
-1

This website is horrible: http://www.modern-females.com Welcome to modern-females.com, the site which examines the sad decline of modern women, looks at why feminism is a malignant, destructive, bogus philosophy based around hating men and playing the victim and educates on why women in general are so difficult to live with... Something about people who live in glass houses...
/r/MensRights11/10/13 05:27 PM
2

I actually really enjoyed the book. There are some problems with her work, but overall I thought she gave a an interesting insight to the learning masculinity. I saw a lot of my own personal experiences as a guy in her descriptions of masculinity in high school. I was out early in high school, and for me personally the fag epithet meant something very specific to me, but on reflection, I can see how it is used to learn masculinity in high school. The extreme lack of girls' voices in the book - p…
/r/MensRights10/10/13 02:30 PM
1

The point, whch you are dodging, is that [JudgyBitch is] a black women... I just stumbled on this video of her, are we taking about the same woman?
/r/MensRights09/10/13 06:15 PM
1

There is this really famous essay by Heidi Hartmann that talks about the historical relationship between feminism and Marxism. It's titled "The Unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Feminism: Towards a More Progressive Union."
/r/MensRights07/10/13 09:10 PM
0

There is nothing about that trope that fits. So unless you can point to something in specific your claim is still dishonest. Zelda is literally put into a crystal and link is forced to save her. She is literally helpless, inside a crystal. She is in danger, because Ganondorf is going to remove the triforce piece from her. I mean, this isn't even unique to Ocarina of time. It fits the trope. But w/e, apparently doing it at the last moment is enough to disqualify it for you.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 06:02 PM
2

I fail to understand how this "pointing out x story is sexist" contributes to the fight for women rights at all. Pointing out a story that you don't like isn't the way to go to "change" a culture, but creating new cultural works that portray your ideology is. I didn't say I didn't like it. I really enjoy Zelda games, as I do a lot of media with problematic content. In fact, I would go so far to say that I enjoy them more because I've developed the tools to understand the tropes and ways gender i…
/r/MensRights07/10/13 04:26 PM
2

t's actually the plot of Twilight Princess. Zelda's actually the leader of her government in that game, and takes steps throughout the game to ensure the survival of her people. Furthermore, she doesn't exist to serve as a romantic interest, either, as Link has significantly more interest in Midna in that game. Yeah, I figured that Twilight Princess was the game in question. And for the most part, doesn't really damsell Zelda that much. But I do think Anita talks about TP, in reference to the fi…
/r/MensRights07/10/13 12:01 PM
-4

It's not like I seriously am going to debate the details of a game that clearly fits the trope Discussing the details is how you show whether the game fits the trope. Yes, but that isn't what I was objecting to. The game fits the trope: there is a woman, who is put at peril, for the benefit of the male leads development. But discussing how the woman is also a ninja is orthogonal to the trope. It would be like if I made the claim that Gandolf is the classic wizard, and someone else dispute that b…
/r/MensRights07/10/13 11:35 AM
-11

Except that it doesn't fit even remotely until about the last ten minutes of the game. She's only ever captured and "in distress" at the very end... is in conflict with ...they just think that a trope isn't present.....because it isn't.. Whatever. It's not like I seriously am going to debate the details of a game that clearly fits the trope (even if it does so through enjoyable storytelling), even if we are disagreeing about extent. I guess, is there any video game that the dissenter of Anita ag…
/r/MensRights07/10/13 04:55 AM
-8

She teaches him some songs (which are admittedly valuable) and provides some exposition. Not to be overly sardonic, but you could almost replace her with a musical sexy lamp. No one is disputing that damselling women can be worked into a detailed story. I'm just saying, if the trope fits... Really, what more do you want from her? She is what she is, and I don't "want" anything. I just would like for some people to consider these things seriously before they decided to reject the conclusion that …
/r/MensRights07/10/13 04:18 AM
-4

I didn't claim said openess is universal, but I do think it's no unheard of. And that's some honesty... unlike the glib claim" We would say "why the fuck is men helping men group asking women for money." Bye!
/r/MensRights07/10/13 04:07 AM
-8

Because a story where a woman (chief virtue is wisdom) holds her country together single handedly when it comes under attack by dark forces shows women as disempowered... I am 99% sure that is not the plot of Ocarina of Time. After Zelda flees Hyrule, she spends seven years hiding until Link shows up. Seven years of being completely useless until Link shows up. Zelda may be a cool character in some respects, but she hardly breaks the trope.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 03:53 AM
-5

Oh, you mean the domestic violence shelters that are gender-neutral and definitely do not discriminate against men, as we are assured by feminists such as yourself? Oh, you mean the not explicitly "women's shelters?" Yes, of course those are open to men, I've worked with resources available to both men and women with both men and women.
/r/MensRights07/10/13 03:46 AM
-5

Of course, in the same way this sub never gets upset when a women's shelter isn't helping men. Everyone here responds "why the fuck is man asking a women helping women [organization] for help?"
/r/MensRights07/10/13 03:30 AM
1

I was being honest, I seriously don't read or pay a lot of attention to sex-negative feminists or their work. It tends to fringe or connected to other things I disprove of (for example, transphobia). So I seriously haven't read any modern feminist scholarship or been witness to any modern activists that are in conflict with BDSM feminists. The Wikipedia page is talking about unnamed feminists, so I imagine it's almost a throwaway paragraph. I'd believe there are contemporary feminists who are ag…
/r/MensRights04/10/13 07:43 PM
2

I'm not sure why you keep linking to the wikipedia article, when it is supporting the point I am making: Current feminist viewpoints on BDSM practices continue to be controversial and at odds with one another. Some feminists view SM as an ideal feminist expression of sexual freedom while other feminists say that BDSM, and more particularly SM, reinforce patriarchy and that these practices are contradictory to feminism.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 11:54 AM
3

BDSM feminists? I don't actually know of any modern feminists that they conflict with. There are still some anti-pornography feminists about, but I don't think they're the mainstream.
/r/MensRights04/10/13 01:57 AM
4

Wow, cool to know. I was reading the other day about how some groups of BDSM feminist lesbians (say that five times fast) conflicted with second wave separatists feminist lesbians. It was kind of interesting. Regardless, good job Leather Lesbians!
/r/MensRights04/10/13 01:16 AM
1

Do you have any concrete examples? For example, woman face significant barriers when participating in the sciences, engineering, mathematics, and (even) philosophy. A recent publication by some Yale faculty showed "a gender bias" against women when they're reviewed for employment. In a randomized double-blind study (n = 127), science faculty from research-intensive universities rated the application materials of a student—who was randomly assigned either a male or female name—for a laboratory ma…
/r/MensRights04/10/13 12:49 AM
1

What I'm asking is if you believe that both these benefits and drawbacks have been roughly equivalent in terms of how much they hinder and aid each sex. I don't believe this, because I don't believe that gender equality is a zero-sum game. And by the way, it's not that difficult to roughly quantify suffering, unless you believe that the sexes have inherently different emotional thresholds? Really? Because I seriously question whether we can quantify it. I mean, we can measure air pressure, tempe…
/r/MensRights03/10/13 02:24 PM
1

I don't know how to quantify suffering in any meaningful way. I don't think they're equal because I don't think they're easily comparable. Nope, I don't believe this. I do believe that women and men still face a lot of inequalities. About the same in number and severity or one more than the other? I think that the inequalities faced by women more often than not oppress them, and the inequalities faced by men more often than not privilege them.
/r/MensRights03/10/13 01:42 PM
1

So you are a feminist that does not believe in the concept of patriarchy and everything that entails. Yes, I do believe in the concept of patriarchy, but that is completely different from the MRA canard about Patriarchy Theory. No, I do not believe in what MRAs believe Patriarchy Theory to be, and all that MRAs believe that entails. I actually address the issue of MRA misunderstandings of patriarchy here: A significant part of the MRM conflict with feminism is over ideas about feminist theory. T…
/r/MensRights03/10/13 12:42 PM
1

Why is it that you assume I don't know anything about feminism? It's evinced in your following sentence: It's not exactly an obscure or complex subject. For proof, you can look at wikipedia's page on different feminist movements. Why can't you believe instead that I understand it but simply believe that it is a morally bankrupt ideology that does not reflect reality? Because you've put forth very little to support your (new) claim it's a "bankrupt ideology." And second because you whole idea tha…
/r/MensRights03/10/13 03:47 AM
1

You are not worth talking to. Well, it's hard to argue with me when I know far more about modern feminism than you (and I guess historical feminism too). EDIT: And you're really going to complain to me about ad hominem? When you've spent this entire conversation dismissing feminism outright because feminists "aren't women anyway, they're whiny overgrown girls," are "privileged American white women" (great job erasing the existence of nonwhite feminists and non-American feminists), and "are spoil…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 08:59 PM
1

I guess that lends credence to the idea that you don't really know anything about feminism (which is indeed the problem). Whatever, I'm am disgusted that you assume an association with me, because associations are reflexive. I don't consider myself associates with intellectually lazy feminist "haters," even if we ostensibly share an love of men. The difference is probably that I share an equal love for women (though it takes different forms). I'll never understand how gay me of all people can be…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 06:04 PM
1

That's the opposite of what I said.... Exactly, I was showing you the contradiction in your statement. read closer bro. MRAs are one of the most universally gay-friendly communities on the internet, probably second only to atheists. I wrote up a little summary for you, and posted it in reply to your complaint of "word salad." even when it's obvious to anyone with eyes that a certain strain of gay men overwhelmingly gravitate towards feminism. What "certain strain" of gay men? If you are going to…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 05:32 PM
1

I'm not going to read that word salad. If you have a point to make, do so concisely. "word salad"? I hate the stereotype that gay men are vapid and illiterate. In the article, I present the writings of a number of MRAs, and their dependence "on the retention of heterosexist, cissexist, and (simply) sexist notions of masculinity." Phil's description of feminist gay men plays into the subordination of gay masculinities within the gender hierarchy, while making clear that "normal" masculinity is av…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 05:05 PM
0

The point, whch you are dodging, is that she's a black women, in connection with your wonderment at the analogy between misandry and racism. I am not sure what your point is. Shouldn't she be taking this up with black feminists? I mean, there are a lot of great Black feminists, both online and off. I don't understand your point. I'm saying that the analogy between Jim Crow laws (and the culture they were embedded) and modern feminism is a false analogy. Also, I've read her blog, it's a shithole.…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 04:53 PM
1

I am ashamed that gay men like you exist, I think you are a disgrace and I don't like how that reflects upon me in the presence of people I respect, even when they are kind enough to not judge me based on your actions. Cool. Well, I think it's sad when gay men depend on misogynistic fictions to justify their self-worth. Fortunately I recognize that you behavior won't reflect on me. I take a very strong stance against misogyny, heterosexism and cissexism. My actions and self-identifications refle…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 04:15 PM
1

Every time I see it confirmed that yet another male feminist is a poof makes me feel how I imagine black men feel when they see that the guy that robbed a store/stabbed someone/etc is black. What does this even mean? I know collective guilt is bullshit but it's hard not to feel discouraged because you know that if you can notice the correlation other people will too, and judge you accordingly. What? MRAs are actually very good at not judging men like me by the stereotype but it still leaves me f…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 03:43 PM
1

The "something" is that they are spoiled little entitlement princesses who think men are born to serve them and then turn around and whine about what an oppressed class they are. That's really strange. I know a lot of feminists (and feminist women) and I don't know a single one who fits that description. It sounds like a straw feminist. And I am hardly conflating "feminists" and women. These aren't women anyway, they're whiny overgrown girls. Lol, policing the gender of feminists... that's not n…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 02:55 PM
0

We are talking about privileged American white women. Like my ex, like campus feminists. Aren't we? Are we? Because "campus feminists" sounds like a blithe over generalization. But I get it, you don't like a specific set of women because "something." And you're refusing to articulate that dislike as something other than feminism/being a woman. It's like the process of growing up white under Jim Crow Boy... what's up with all these false analogies to racism here?
/r/MensRights02/10/13 12:20 PM
2

That's the most ridiculous example of histrionics I've seen all day. When you show that you can't argue your point without that, you don't have a point. Seriously? You're just demonstrating that you're unwilling to recognize how serious men's issues are (and even willing to use words like "histrionics" to describe your detractors). You're more intellectually corrupt then I originally thought.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 11:59 AM
1

Sorry, I wasn't willing to let people die simply because I might have not wanted to put on a tie. Not the same kind of concern, one out weights the other.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 04:41 AM
1

Whatever kind of oppression that made me suspicious of the "queer" usage in the video. Also, I am aware of the kinds of oppression that make Paul Elam's transphobic attacks of R.W. Connell so disgusting.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 04:40 AM
2

I get it. You just keep asserting I'm faking my concern. That's a winning strategy. Also, you by definition rule out the possibility of any "good" feminists with your false dichotomy ("There are two kinds of feminists..."). And you have a weak grasp of feminist theory, in both your generalization and failure to understand the diversity (you collapse them all into one theory, your Patriarchy Theory, and then get upset when feminists tell you you've got it wrong). As long as you pretend men's righ…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 04:38 AM
3

No, honey it's because as a gay man the only fish you have to put up with is on your plate. I have plenty of friends (who happen to be women, gasp!) and I don't really share you bleak outlook. It's really obnoxious that you've collapsed feminists and women into one entity: You can go be feminists' good little lapdog Liberace if you want, but I am telling you, you deserve better. They will only ever use you, because when it comes right down to it, you're just a man and you really don't count as i…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 04:15 AM
-1

Yeah... I don't know if you actually know what he meant. I'm not really going to continue questioning your particular answers to what he meant.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 03:39 AM
0

A whole bunch of people stopped by to tell me what he's thinking. I'm not putting words into his mouth, I am questioning the words coming out of everyone's mouth. The original user has yet to respond. But you do bring up an interesting point. Why is everyone else putting words into his mouth?
/r/MensRights02/10/13 03:38 AM
0

Why are women specifically susceptible to this "brainwashing"?
/r/MensRights02/10/13 03:01 AM
4

Also. Lots of feminists have called out other feminists for being bigots. Black feminism was a huge response to certain 2nd wave feminists. And today, lots of trans feminists, queer feminists, Marxists feminists critique essentialist feminists and separatist feminists. Feminism does do a lot of critical self-reflection... it's just usually not discussed here (for the obvious reasons).
/r/MensRights02/10/13 03:00 AM
8

Is it, because I called out Paul Elam for being transphobic, and everyone seemed to believe that he wasn't (or that it doesn't matter).
/r/MensRights02/10/13 02:57 AM
0

Yes. I stopped using that account because the name was too contentious, and my message was confused with a perceived message of "belittling men victims of rape." I haven't exactly been secretive of this.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 02:53 AM
6

So I would say no gay man should be that kind of feminist, whichever brand that was. Unfortunately the term is practically meaningless as it has become far too broad. Now I'm kinda confused. Couldn't the same thing be said about the MRA. I've witnessed heterosexism from MRAs (and I certainly don't think all are heterosexists). I just don't understand how the "broadness" of a movement's diversity of homophobia suggests that respective movements are "practically meaningless"?
/r/MensRights02/10/13 02:31 AM
1

You're squirming over the contradictions you've made to yourself in this conversation is fascinating. Do you not understand the difference between is and ought. Because I do, and I've been trying to make that distinction clear in this conversation. It might explain you confusion (see, it happens to all of us).
/r/MensRights02/10/13 02:19 AM
1

I have been attacked for my sexuality, and I still took a moment to investigate the statement before jumping to conclusions. You're millage may very when hearing people mumble queer at a crowd. I guess I've experienced a kind of oppression that you haven't. Is this an example of female privilege?
/r/MensRights02/10/13 02:16 AM
0

Okay... why would feminism make someone grateful to be gay if... there are plenty of nonfeminist straight/bi women. and there are feminist gay/bi men. If both of the above bullets are true, that why be grateful?
/r/MensRights02/10/13 02:14 AM
1

The pro-feminist rhetoric pretty much identifies you as a troll, rather than a genuine contributor. pro-feminist? I explicitly identify as a feminist (in both life and in user name). Claiming to genuinely care about men's issues is meaningless when in the same paragraph you defend the movement that is the cause of some men's issues and one of the main contributing factors holding back the resolution of others. I just sincerely disagree with you about the nature of feminism, and it's historical t…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 01:59 AM
1

You obviously have more of a problem than you're admitting. What "more of a problem than you're admitting"? I mean, I can understand people using the term "chubby" as endearing ("my cat is fuzzy and chubby"). But I just don't understand why you think that it's a "neutral" descriptor. it's hilarious to see you now complaining about narrow social standards because you think you're seeing them applied to a woman, but you have no problem applying them to the MRM. You mean the part where I explain ab…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 01:37 AM
0

Oh. Well, I do have experiences of people using queer as a derogatory remark. So yeah, experiencing real homophobia has the effect of recognizing mumbly speeches containing the word queer as homophobic, or at least ignorant. I don't know what "nature" that shows...
/r/MensRights02/10/13 01:26 AM
0

Look, you aren't going to get anywhere feigning benevolence. The "benevolence" isn't feigned. I've had a number of encounters lately with MRA-feminists and concerned non-anti-feminist MRAs. One particular discussion made brought me back to a place I was at almost a year ago, when I was trying to help MRAs. These MRAs genuinely care about men's issues (like I do) and feel conflicted with the overall anti-feminism and misogyny in the movement. I know two of them who've just kind of abandoned the M…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 01:23 AM
-4

Well... why be thank full you're gay? Isn't there non-brainwashed women. And the implication is that gay men aren't feminists (because otherwise, they'd be brainwashed too).
/r/MensRights02/10/13 01:11 AM
1

Sorry if I don't believe that you didn't meant chubby as negative in the same sentence as you list her as being a "loudmouthed, privileged princess" who sounds "like an angry bluejay." Like now I think you're heaping bullshit. And I don't think there is anything wrong with someone having unconventional hair or a body that doesn't fit a narrow societal standard.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 01:06 AM
0

Sorry, as far as I can tell it was confusing because he was mumbling. How is anyone outside of TO suppose to know he was meaning "Queers Against Israeli Apartheid [the group]" vs. saying "some of [those protesters] are queers, against Israeli apartheid, and supported sharia regime." The latter which is what I interpreted.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 01:02 AM
0

Not innocent (whatever that means) questions. I guess, important questions. I mean, I'm positive that other people read something similar in the usage of the term "queer" even if it wasn't the intention of the speaker. In fact, this goes right back to the topic of presenting oneself as a movement. A lot of the speakers (like the guy in question) didn't seem prepared, and whatever their meaning got muddled. I guess advice number 2: have clear messages that sync with your language. I think that th…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 12:54 AM
1

the nickname for a chubby, loudmouthed, privileged princess who couldn't have a discussion without sounding like an angry bluejay. Whatever does her body weight have to do with anything. Isn't that petty? And yes, the activist was dressed up very nicely that day. It would seem like the only remarkable thing about her appearance was that she had unconventionally colored hair... to which MRAs seize on when they were choosing a deriding name. I mean, her hair has nothing to do with her message, but…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 12:49 AM
0

You know, I don't buy that either. Okay... don't buy it then. Like, I'm not trying to "win" anything. If you don't think there is any substance to the things I've been saying, then that's fine. But I'm pretty sure the confusion about the "queers against..." phrase in the speech isn't something unique to just me. And I even know about BASH Back TO. And like, I guess you don't have to "buy" my advice about presenting oneself as part of a movement. It's totally your decision.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 12:45 AM
1

Also, apparently the guy was talking about a specific activist group in TO, which would explain the confusion on my part.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 12:41 AM
0

Where did I think I was going to go with what lead-in?
/r/MensRights02/10/13 12:39 AM
0

Weird. I guess that the local knowledge of QuAIA makes it seem weird to those people outside TO.
/r/MensRights02/10/13 12:38 AM
1

Well, yeah, that was a tool too. But you can't tell me that "Big Red" hasn't become a symbol of "mainstream feminism" for the MRM?
/r/MensRights02/10/13 12:05 AM
0

Sorry, I didn't think there was some sort of "argument" going on. Like, something that can be "won." The topic was on Dean and I actually tried to move it away from him personally, towards the topic of "speaking in public as a movement." Which I think is much better than targeting Dean specifically (because it is petty). I don't think that there is a debate here. I don't think your contention was that "we ought not care about our appearances." Because I didn't think you were saying that, but rat…
/r/MensRights02/10/13 12:03 AM
1

Her physical appearance wasn't used as a tool - merely the appearance her behavior gave. This is incredibly disingenuous. The name given to her by AVFM was "Big Red." Neither part of that name reference any behavior.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:58 PM
0

http://bambuser.com/v/3963813 The guy starts speaking at 2:11. Derogatory remark around 3:14 "Clapped" off the stage at 3:38
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:57 PM
1

Booed? There were two different speakers that mentioned communism, you must be thinking the other. I mean specifically the speaker who used the term "queers" derogatorily. From the video footage the person was clapped off the stage. No boos as far as I can hear, just the sound of approving hands.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 11:49 PM
-13

Boy-o, as a feminist gay man, I'm am embarrassed by your equation between feminism and women.
/r/MensRights01/10/13 10:47 PM
1

Trying to make excuses justify a petty jab is ridiculous, and draws you into the pettiness of it, rather than providing support for it. I am not trying to make excuses for it, I am pointing out that regardless of it's "pettiness" there is something important in what truthjusticeca. If you want to dismiss it simply because it's petty, then you're free to do so. I was providing an explanation to why one's appearance when "representing" is important. Whether this is how thing ought to be is another…
/r/MensRights01/10/13 03:45 PM
1

Maybe you can clear something up for me. Who exactly was the speaker(s) who complained about the communists and "queers"? How exactly do they fit into the MRM?
/r/MensRights01/10/13 03:37 PM
0

But he's kind of got a point. I mean, it's not nice to hear, but the way you look does communicate a lot about yourself. Consider for a moment how quickly many MRAs and folks at AVFM latched onto the physical appearance of "the red-haired feminist" from Toronto. Whether right or not, her appearance was used as a tool to rally certain perceptions of her and of feminists in general. I watched the rally footage, and I have to agree with truthjusticeca, Dean should have dressed for the occasion. The…
/r/MensRights01/10/13 02:54 AM
2

It's actually really short, and the Elam's commentary on Connell is at the beginning and ending of the article. http://mensnewsdaily.com/2010/04/22/mens-studies-foremost-authority-opts-for-castration-literally/
/r/MensRights30/09/13 04:30 AM
0

I really should have listed Elam's transphobic article first, people seem to buy his bullshit in the first one. But I'd seriously love to see a defense of his disgusting personal attacks of R.W. Connell.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 02:16 AM
-2

I really should have listed Elam's transphobic article first, people seem to buy his bullshit in the first one. But I'd seriously love to see a defense of his disgusting personal attacks of R.W. Connell.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 02:16 AM
-2

Just calling the bullshit like I see it.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 12:24 AM
-3

Cool. You seem to be lacking anything substantial to offer, intellectual or otherwise. Thank for letting me know.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 12:23 AM
-3

Sorry, I care enough about queer men (and otherwise) to call out the bullshit when I see it. It's not my fault that some MRAs want to congregate around an outspoken sexist, anti-trans, anti-gay asshole.
/r/MensRights30/09/13 12:01 AM
-5

Such phobia, surely Mr. Elam's hatred knows no bounds. He spends a significant amount of time in this article dismissing and belittling a huge section of the LGBT movement. He constructs the "good queer," someone who rejects feminism and LGBT activism. Of course, this "bad queers" are by Elam's description, they've become a "special interest group" that is incapable of knowing their own status (of course, unless Elam steps down to inform them). [Gay men] have no idea who their real enemies are. …
/r/MensRights29/09/13 07:53 PM
-10

The logic was probably related to Paul Elam and other contributors to AVFM. There does seem to be a history of homophobia and racism on that site (not to mention outright transphobia on the part of Elam)
/r/MensRights29/09/13 01:01 PM
1

to just demonstrate the distance between MRA understanding of feminism and feminists and "actual" feminism and feminists. All feminists or all of feminism no. Significant amounts? Yes.
/r/MensRights27/09/13 02:42 AM
1

I guess in retrospect, that argument about " patriarchy theory" is somewhat tangential, and more to just demonstrate the distance between MRA understanding of feminism and feminists and "actual" feminism and feminists. Whatever, the point is that the OP's provided understanding that "[patriarchy] is the base dogma, a theory that unequivocally holds that, in blanket terms, men rule over women" is an incorrect characterization of all feminists, all feminist theory, or feminism in general.
/r/MensRights27/09/13 02:27 AM
1

Actually. I would argue that I know plenty of people outside gender studies that know that phrase. And I would also argue that academic feminists are feminists in real life. And that there is an actual ignorance going on here about what "real life" feminists are like or what they say. But this isn't really getting us anywhere because... that is the very crux of the problem. A feminist disputes a characterization of feminism and then some MRA links to JtO to assert all feminists are like that. As…
/r/MensRights27/09/13 02:08 AM
1

I appreciate your post, but the issue is whats expressed rather than what theories exist. Okay. Well if you Google the phrase "patriarchy theory" you actually get evidence of the claim I made. The links are to either MRAs (or other nonfeminist commentators) discussing patriarchy theory or Wikipedia redirecting you to patriarchy, the description. I mean, I am just disputing the claim that feminists really talk about patriarchy theory in any significant way and disputing the generalities proposed …
/r/MensRights27/09/13 01:32 AM
1

I know you're not going to like this >.< but the following is just simply wrong: [Feminism], an institution and ideology in which patriarchy theory is the base dogma, a theory that unequivocally holds that, in blanket terms, men rule over women and are thus a problem First, "patriarchy theory" is really not what feminists use (they do use the phrase "feminist theory" though). I mean, to get an idea of how not used the phrase is, consider using google scholar: "patriarchy theory" --- About 209 re…
/r/MensRights27/09/13 01:14 AM
1

Cunt, a declaration of independance Cool. I've never read it but it sounds interesting. which was written in 2002 so I was assuming by date alone would constitute as third wave. That was probably an error? The "wave" classification of feminism can be unhelpful when trying to understand the history of feminism. It sometimes can be useful as a short-hand, but overall I think it's less useful than other ways of organizing the history of feminism. I don't think that you were necessarily in error, be…
/r/MensRights26/09/13 03:03 PM
1

Along those lines, it wasn't even part of the question, which you have also failed to answer. You're right, I failed to answer the question about a reaction in /r/feminism or /r/askfeminism if someone claimed "...it seems to reproduce the idea that a lot of Feminists are anti-MR because (in part) of a lack of knowledge about MR." I guess I think the reaction would vary depending on the legitimacy (which I did address) of the claim. But I am not sure there would be an overall, consistent kind or …
/r/MensRights26/09/13 12:40 PM
1

I notice you didn't even acknowledge that I didn't say anything to the affect of "crazy feminists getting book deals" etc. Sorry I didn't realize that I was talking to a different person. my bad.
/r/MensRights26/09/13 12:15 PM
1

Let me ask you a question: If the situations were reversed, and we were on /r/AskFeminists or /r/Feminism, what do you (honestly) think the reaction would be to me saying: "...it seems to reproduce the idea that a lot of Feminists are anti-MR because (in part) of a lack of knowledge about MR."? Well, if it was on the heels of someone making a big claim about "crazy MRAs getting book deals" and then them failing to actually show they knew any crazy MRAs who get book deals, then the criticism woul…
/r/MensRights26/09/13 03:20 AM
0

I think it's interesting. I kind of like the mobius strip analogy.
/r/MensRights26/09/13 03:11 AM
1

What are you identifying as second wave, and what as third. Though I usually avoid using the terms (they're far to broad), usually people identify "mainstream" second wave feminism as the problematic "brand." What are you looked at in the second wave? And what is it you're reading that's third wave?
/r/MensRights26/09/13 03:07 AM
1

Edit to add: Not sure if it applies directly to the question of who is getting book deals/speaking engagements, I don't want to put the time into Googling it. Just pointing something out I saw earlier today. Not to push the point too abrasively... It seems then like your claim "Feminism has crazies, but they get book deals and speaking engagements" doesn't actually seem to hold water, at least when it comes to modern feminism. I mean, I actually (as a feminist) do think there are some "bad" femi…
/r/MensRights26/09/13 02:46 AM
1

The videos may or may not be out of context, but usually when someone comes across as that closed-minded and belligerent, I tend to not pay much attention to what they say. Actually, that's exactly what it seems to me. A while ago I watched a lot of videos featuring her because I was curious about what exactly happened (and because the vitriol directed at her seemed extreme, even if she is an "avowed misandrist"). I'm of the opinion that 80% of the "person" presented as Chanty Binx is from the i…
/r/MensRights26/09/13 02:29 AM
-1

Who are these feminist crazies getting book deals and speaking engagements? There are certainly feminists of the 80s, and even 90s, who had bad ideas that landed them some popularity. But what feminists crazies are still at larger today?
/r/MensRights26/09/13 12:32 AM
0

This girl was in her early twenties, as was her boyfriend. he was "pressuring" her for sex. He wasn't blackmailing or coercing her. He was doing what people in relationships do after a certain point; they push for more. If the girl wasn't comfortable with having sex, she probably shouldn't have invited him over to have sex. she initiated the contact. It happened on her terms. That she decided later, after the fact, that she didn't want to have sex with him is irrelevant. I don't actually think y…
/r/MensRights24/09/13 12:10 AM
-2

First, it is a breech if copyright for Sarkeesian to use the lets play footage for profit off of youtube. But she didn't use it for profit. The videos are free. She is trying to sell herself as an academic. An academic who does not cite the sorce of materials used but instead insinuates or infers that it is their own work is guilty of this thing called "plagarism". It isn't plagiarism because she's not trying to pass the clips off as her own work. There may be a concern that she ought to have at…
/r/MensRights21/09/13 05:42 PM
-1

How about we start with the proven allegation that Sarkeesian stole her gameplay footage from youtube let's plays Yes. And it's not illegal at all. It's part of fair use. So, she needs to respond to the fact that she's done nothing illegal? Now, the idea that "her intentions to monetize the videos by licensing them to educational institutions" is a complete fabrication. Nothing proven about it. And saying "she intends to use feminism to strong arm them into buying" is the most absurd.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 01:02 PM
-4

Am I the only one who's noticed that as her videos progressed from part 1 to part 2, and from part 2 to part 3, Anita actually responded to a lot of the misconceptions about her video? I for one have actually not seen any valid criticisms of her work, specifically because I actually don't think there is much to criticism. But she does a good job reiterating the important points that people seem to constantly be misinterpreting.
/r/MensRights21/09/13 02:46 AM
-5

Seriously? To not "censor debate" Anita has to respond to and refute all 400 videos?
/r/MensRights21/09/13 01:50 AM
7

Intersectionality is a new movement in feminism Intersectionality isn't actually that new, it's been around for over 20 years.
/r/MensRights20/09/13 01:08 PM
8

I am not actually sure that the Jacobs is advocating that "cyber-rape" (and whatever it entails) ought to be prosucted under the law as rape. And I don't think that Jacobs was identified as a feminist in the article. So, I am not sure where the idea that she is a "feminist activist" is coming from.
/r/MensRights15/09/13 02:43 AM
2

I agree. I am not actually sure that the Jacobs is advocating that "cyber-rape" (and whatever it entails) ought to be prosucted under the law as rape.
/r/MensRights15/09/13 02:42 AM
5

Are instances of expanding our definitions of rape or sexual assault something that MRAs are against? Is expanding these definitions bad?
/r/MensRights15/09/13 01:06 AM
1

Isn't the entire purpose of froshing/hazing to either do unpleasant, humiliating, potentially reputation-damaging things to pledges, or to make them do unpleasant, humiliating, potentially reputation-damaging things? Frosh/orientation is not the same as "rush week," the latter being the period where for perspective students try to join fraternities or sororities. Froshing/orientation is something that almost all students are required to attend, while rush is and elected activity. The chants that…
/r/MensRights13/09/13 11:36 PM
2

And if I had addressed all your points, would it have really mattered? I've already acknowledged in the above post that your reasoning is circular, so all I had to do was break the link you made between "feminists being bad" and "feminists never being good." The fundamental part of your argument (and all other arguments objecting to the existence of feminist MRAs) is that feminism is a monolithic hate movement. All anyone has to do to counter it is point out that this isn't true and that you are…
/r/MensRights02/09/13 11:12 AM
2

Honestly, your idea that feminism is a hate movement is just your opinion. What's even more important is that contemporarily, feminists of color, postmodern feminists, marxist feminists, and queer feminist see this history as evidence of entrenched and interconnected "inequality-isms" that must be addressed (and often addressed in radically new ways). bell hooks, Kimberle Crenshaw, Judith Butler, Eleanor Marx, and J. Halberstam all work(ed) to identify the ways in which the intersections of ineq…
/r/MensRights01/09/13 03:07 PM
1

What's even more important is that contemporarily, feminists of color, postmodern feminists, marxist feminists, and queer feminist see this history as evidence of entrenched and interconnected "inequality-isms" that must be addressed (and often addressed in radically new ways). bell hooks, Kimberle Crenshaw, Judith Butler, Eleanor Marx, and J. Halberstam all work(ed) to identify the ways in which the intersections of inequality produce powerful places in of activism. In reflecting on the troubli…
/r/MensRights01/09/13 03:00 PM
1

That just seems like a selective read of the history, you choose to read only the bad as feminism, and arbitrarily argue that the good isn't feminism.
/r/MensRights01/09/13 12:01 PM
-1

Usually the mod of /r/feminism instructs topics like this be moved to /r/AskFeminists, at least that's what I've normally observed.
/r/MensRights01/09/13 02:23 AM
1

That's the only response? Yes. I think that there are a number of things that we fundamentally disagree with, and are things I don't see any obvious route in which can be resolved. For example, I don't see how the idea that a "Virgin Auction" (I had to look this up, there is something really weird going on there), which male virgins go for less money then female virgins is evidence that men's sexuality is worth less. Seeing as how the vast majority of people don't select their mates (with very s…
/r/MensRights01/09/13 02:11 AM
1

Notice how Hulk is essentially gay presenting (in terms of traditional representation) and we're all supposed to be enlightened by this with the realization that "oh, I can see now how awful it must be to be presented as sexual". What is "gay presenting"?
/r/MensRights01/09/13 01:32 AM
4

Um... there is a lot going on here. Then there was the White Feather campaign, which shamed men and boys into military service during WWII While there is no doubt that suffragettes Emmeline Pankhurst her daughter Christabel Pankhurst were part of the white feather campaign, it seems like the relation between their status of suffragette (or 'protofeminist,' if you're willing to accept the term) and their activities in the campaign don't seem to be related. In fact, isn't it true that Mary Augusta…
/r/MensRights31/08/13 09:54 PM
1

I was thinking of various "Hawkeye Initiative" comics. I am not sure what is wrong with the Hawkeye Initiative. It does do a good job of showing a double standard.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 02:14 PM
1

But the problem is they misrepresent the normal interaction between men and women in the original media by mistaking the relationship. In the original video, there are several instances of the men displaying that they are not entitled to their bodies and instead showing appreciation . For example, Pharrell Williams "impressed" expression a few seconds into the vid (NSFW). Or for example the way Thicke stands still watching the girl dancing impressed with her body, or follows them around (a submi…
/r/MensRights31/08/13 02:07 PM
2

I think the /u/FUCKCUNTSHITPOOBUM is being a deliberate troll. I don't think they are actually interested in being serious.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 01:25 PM
25

I believe this is the case because a lot of MRAs locate the problems men face as problems produced by feminism and identify their political opponents as feminists or feminism.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 01:21 PM
-1

Whenever they gender flip anything they normally can't help but add in shaming of feminine men or feminine entitlement to a man's body. I guess that I don't actually see the first thing going on, the "shaming of feminine men." I didn't notice it in the video. On the other hand, I do agree that there was the presence of "feminine entitlement to a man's body," but I imagine that would be a necessary thing to do to actually "flip" the genders from the Thicke video and song. Thicke's video and song …
/r/MensRights31/08/13 01:04 PM
-1

I thought it was pretty measured. I'm not sure I see where the feeling of uneasiness is coming from.
/r/MensRights31/08/13 04:08 AM
1

If you want to do something then start talking to students at the university. From the article, it looks like they did. Outside of the message boards though, students see this as a non-issue. “I see the issue some people can have with it, but in all honestly, it doesn’t really create an issue for me,” said Ariel Kodis. “Isn’t the program advisor for the women’s studies program a man?” Kodis, a senior sociology major at Stony Brook University, says the idea of having feminists on the advisory boa…
/r/MensRights28/08/13 04:41 PM
1

Oh. I kinda thought it would be this one: http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/ill-decide-if-you-were-raped-not-you/
/r/MensRights28/08/13 12:19 AM
10

Actually, it is very possible for a man to be physically aroused but not consenting to sex. I am not sure what your wife was thinking, but an erection does not equal consent. It would be rape.
/r/MensRights28/08/13 12:09 AM
1

No. What I am saying is that if that is what you identify as the "waves" of feminism, then your knowledge of the breadth of feminist scholarship and activism is woefully narrow.
/r/MensRights17/08/13 03:11 AM
0

Baring the obvious problems with the whole idea of "waves," this image also seems to have missed the boat on what was actually going on in "second" and "third wave" (or contemporary) feminism.
/r/MensRights17/08/13 02:05 AM
1

So, is it that you think because white men make more money than black men, black women, and white women, you think white men are slaves to black men, black women, and white women?
/r/MensRights16/08/13 01:20 PM
1

Where? What specific sources?
/r/MensRights15/08/13 06:05 PM
0

Do you have any specific links or sources?
/r/MensRights15/08/13 04:17 PM
2

After reading articles on reddit, facebook, and news sites, it is becoming more apparent that heterosexual men in general are not allowed to express their sexuality without often being labeled a creep or disgusting. So, did you mean to title this post "The confusing dilemma of modern male heterosexuality"? Because it seems like you explanations only really extends over heterosexuality.
/r/MensRights12/08/13 11:30 PM
1

You know. I've actually been reconsidering my original user name. Do you think it would be better if I changed? I don't want people to get the idea that I don't take the concerns of men who've been victims of rape or sexual assault seriously. Though Spermjack_attack was adopted as a username because I was upset about the misogyny built into the concept of "spermjacking," I don't think people are picking up on that nuance of my username. Maybe it's time I just transition to a new account.
/r/MensRights13/07/13 09:37 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter